|
|  |
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date index][Thread index]
RE: st: xtivreg2, overidxt,
Nicola et al.,
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected]
> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of
> [email protected]
> Sent: 15 March 2007 11:17
> To: [email protected]
> Cc: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: st: xtivreg2, overidxt,
>
> May be you installed -ivreg2- from SJ rather than from ssc,
> which usually provides the newest version. Solution:
> ssc install ivreg2, replace
> For the interpretation, it depends on what you think about
> the p-value. If you usually reject the null hypothesis for
> any p<5%, then everything is fine. I you reject the null
> hypothesis also for any 10%<p<5%, then the test casts doubt
> on the validity of the instruments. Please note that
> -xtoverid- produces a similar test and may give slightly
> different results (running the example at the end of the help
> for -overidxt- yealds a p=.4138; re-running with -xtoverid-
> yealds a p=.4411)
In case you're curious, the reason for the difference is that -xtoverid-
(and -xtivreg2-) correct for the loss of degrees of freedom because of
the fixed effects, which are nuisance parameters. -overidxt- does not
make this correction, and as a result it is more likely (too likely) to
reject the null of valid instruments.
It's similar to the adjustment needed for the error variance when
constructing the var-cov matrix for the fixed effects estimator. The
error variance is bigger after the adjustment (and hence p-values for
paramater tests are bigger); here, the overid statistic is smaller after
the adjustment (and hence the p-value is bigger). Or, put another way,
the usual Sargan overid test is an N*R2 test. In a balanced panel with
N fixed effects and T periods, it's an (NT-N)*R2 test, because in effect
N observations are "lost" because of the estimation of the fixed
effects.
Cheers,
Mark
>
> Nicola
>
> At 02.33 14/03/2007 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
> >Dear statalist,
> >I have some problems to implement xtivreg2 because stata
> give me this error:
> >Error - must have ivreg2 (or ivreg28, for Stata 8 users) version
> >2.1.15 or greater installed
> >r(601);
> >
> >I have update stata, I use stata 9 and I installed the
> package iverg28
> >and ivreg2.
> >
> >Other question is: how I interpret overidxt? when my p value
> is 10% my
> >instrument is correleted with my dipendent variable? or I refuse the
> >null hypothesis and so the instrument that I use is ok?
> >thanks so much for your help
>
> *
> * For searches and help try:
> * http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/res/findit.html
> * http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq
> * http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/
>
*
* For searches and help try:
* http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/res/findit.html
* http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq
* http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/
